Bob Hanson wrote: > Nicolas Vervelle wrote: > > >> I get the same problem (if I remove the -Xmx 512m option). >> >> >> >> > Right, good. So you can test a bit. Well the point is to use as little > memory as possible so that we can track this bugger down. > > But it may be normal: > > Can't be acceptable. "normal" is not relevant. > Well, it can really be "normal": if you don't specify a -Xmx parameter on the java command line, then the maximum memory authorized for the JVM is very low (something like 64M or 128M). This is how Java works and we can't do anything about it at programming level: the user must run Jmol with a bigger memory limit. That's why, for example, I renamed the biggest file in Jmol-datafiles so that JUnit tests don't read it, because we can't read it with this default limit.
> do we only clear the previous model when the new > one has been loaded ? > > > hmm. Maybe. But I can ZAP in between -- that would clear it all out -- > and it is the same effect. It doesn't matter how many times I zap > (create a new Frame object), it still happens. > Are you sure that ZAP really removes all references to the previous model ? If it's not the case, then you can end up having the model twice in memory. Nico ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
